[Legend Tournament Final] Bret Hart Vs Ric Flair

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

I think that it goes without saying, even though it's been said over and again, that Bret Hart is without a doubt the better in-ring worker of these two. Is that what defines a legend? To me, while in ring ability plays a small role, I have a different perception of what a legend is.

To me:

A legend is someone who knows how to tell a story..

A legend is someone who can makes the fans care..

A legend is someone who take the ball and roll with it..

A legend is someone who goes night in and night out and puts on the absolute best show that he can..

A legend is someone who cares about the business and does what he can to make it great..

In my humble opinion, there is no greater legend than..




Hulk Hogan. Unfortunately, Bret Hart has already surpassed The Hulkster. I don't think that should have happened, but it did. If I had to choose a runner up, I'd be Naich.

Ric Flair gave us his best for 36 years. He helped shape wrestling into what it is today. After I watched his DVD, I gained a new respect for him. He would wrestle 360 days a year. Ric Flair wrestled every night. He was the business and the business was him. He talked about one week where he wrestled to a 60 minute draw against Dusty Rhodes every single night. That is a remarkable task that no one has come close to repeating.

He truly gave us his all. He put wrestling above his family. While I don't agree with that, and I know he regrets, it still shows his unmatchable dedication to the wrestling business. It was the most important thing in the world to him.

I could go on and on for hours about all the things he accomplished in the ring. I could talk about his excellent talking. But, for me, his dedication is enough to seal the deal. And while Bret is the better athlete and wrestler, he is not a bigger legend.

 

[agentmichaelscarn]

Look at this way Bret has not wrestled in about a decade, hasnt been in the WWE in over a dozen years and outside of his HOF appearance and the 20 second bit he did for McMahon appreciation night he hasnt been on WWE TV in a dozen years yet people still talk about him and care about him. You still see random Bret Hart signs in the crowd, people still pop when the Sharpshooter is applied, people in Canada still boo HBK and pop like crazy any time Bret's name is mentioned and he has been gone this long. And as I pointed out before despite not pluggin his book on WWE TV as soon as it comes out it instantly becomes the top selling wrestling book and still is on Amazon.com. Same thing with his DVD, last time I checked that is the top selling WWE DVD on there outside of Wrestlemania 22. Bret Hart is the definition of a legend worldwide.

To put it in perspective assuming Flair doesnt show his face on any televised wrestling show from now until 2018 do you think people would still talk about him like they do Bret? Im not so sure.

People bring up Flair's 16 championships and rightfully so but Bret had alot of accomplishments himself. Besides being the second man to win 5 WWE world championships, he was the first to win the triple crown and I believe he did that twice over before anybody else did. Bret is also the ONLY man who can say that he won the triple crown in both WWE and WCW. So he is the only guy that can say he basically held every major title in the United States.

The bottom line in my eyes is neither were huge draws by that I mean Hogan or Austin types but I think Bret was bigger worldwide. So basically Id give the advantage to Flair for longevity and mic skills but is that enough to overtake Bret's superior in-ring skills, worldwide drawing and overall popularity worldwide? I dont think it is. But like I said before even though I think its Bret I really dont think there is a wrong answer because both are legends and I can see why one would vote for Flair.

 

[2012isbs]

I voted Hart which tied 16 to 16.
Anyway I think Flair is vastly over rated he has no technical wrestling ability. But is great at promos, he also mentored many stars to help where they are now. He overstayed his welcome gave HbK match of teh year which should have gone to his ladder match against Jericho. He is synomous with NWA, WCW and WWE. He has the classic Whooo chant. How many other people have chants for a simple move like a chop when it's done by someone else who Flair never even met in the ring.
Bret on the other hand is hated by WWE loved by Smarks and people who are Canadian o rhate Vince. His promos were okay. In rin ghe was great he also kade his own title of 'The Hitman' unlike naitch who stole it from Buddy Rogers I think. Hart had great matches against SCSA, HBK, Taker and Owen Hart. Bret though is not over rated in fact he is Under rated. To bad he went against Vince he probably would've gotten the title back anyway. But can't blame him for what he's done.
It was close but, Bret won

 

[Miko]

Flair has got longevity in his favour I'll give him that, I still think though that he had a 30 odd year career and most of it was shite. Flair had success in the NWA and WCW fair enough but as I've said before neither promotion was successfull under Flair, Hart on the other hand was successfull in the WWF and kept the business afloat while wrestling was on a downturn.

My take on it is that Hart is almost certainly the bigger legend, whether it be in-ring work or I'd even say drawing power. All this Flair wrestled 60 minutes and all that is no argument in his defence really, if the bloke was actually any good he wouldnt need to wrestle 60 minutes in order to stay popular as thats the only reason I can see why anybody would want to wrestle for an hour everynight. In my eyes Flair was a god of a non-successful company (kinda like Raven), whereas Hart was a great in the greatest wrestling promotion that ever was.